Your opinions? I got myself started on this topic in another post. I think that the biggest reason it's not legal has to do with the ease of growing your own which the gov't can't tax. I'm a very conservative person, but even I think it's stupid that marijuana is illegal while alcohol isn't. I love alcohol too but it causes way more deaths a year than weed.
Like alcohol prohibition in the past, cannabis prohibition only serves to build a strong underground economy and strengthen mob / gang / criminal organisations.
It grows (wild if given the chance) in almost every region in the world, it can be a food source, a fibre source (not a good one like hemp, but still) a fuel source, a paper pulp supply (the real reason it was made illegal) medicine, and fairly safe recreation. As a recreational drug it is far safer than alcohol, which is legal.
Hypocrasy at it's finest.
Then there's the old... "You're too stupid to know what to do with yourself, so we will tell you and enforce it with law" Nice.
Treating adults like children will cause them to act like children. What ever happened to personal responsibility.
Hemp helped make the US what it is. George Washington grew hemp and drug producing cannabis, that is proven.
Thousands of years without prohibition and somehow we survived as a species.. Hmmm... We must have been much smarter before the 1930s. Whatever...
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
Do it right... sell it along side Tobacco. Otherwise, it's a bullsh*t idea with bullsh*t outcomes.
Seriously, you have to be 18 to buy tobacco, and most retailers won't sell to minors because they'll lose their license... Drug dealers don't have to worry about a license, so why not just create a greater tax base?
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
You have the difficulty of monitoring the growth of it, that is the big thing.
I think the only other thing is that compared to tobacco, you have an easier time to get "buzzed" with weed. Granted, tobacco will do the same thing, but it's a lot easier to get used to tobacco than to marijuana, at least that's my experience. Maybe I'm way off, but that's just me.
Take it like any other sin-item. Alcohol... it's sold legally, and taxed... you can get drunk pretty easily, and people brew their own beer and wine at home with kits.
There's no real difference other than about 100 years of prohibition.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Anything that is less risky than alcohol should be legal.
---
HOORAY for a state with "legal" medical pot and the stores to actually purchase it from.
you can grow your own tobacco and yet the gov't dont care about that. now its to the point where they've spent soo much money keeping it illegal, it would undermine their authority and make people question their actions if they legalized it. there isnt any good reason why its still illegal, other than the fact the the US gov't is a bunch of PC pricks!
I don't know about the US, but in Canada you must be a quota holding, licensed grower to buy tobacco seed or seedlings (typical method). If you are caught growing without quota you are in deep doo-doo.
But you can brew your own beer or wine.. Anything that doesn't involve a still is fair game with alcohol.
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
You can't grow tobacco for commercial use. If you're making for personal use, it's your business.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I don't know how you would get the seed or seedlings. They will not sell them to an unlicensed grower, period. I guess you could get some seedlings from a grower after they are done planting. They must buy a bit extra and have some leftovers.
It would be a mistake though, curing tobacco is a skill and without a good cure tobacco is pretty horrid.
Did I mention that I worked on a tobacco farm for about 6 seasons? A good friend's family used to grow it. Not anymore.
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
I'm all for legalizing pot. It's been a long time coming and overall pot isn't that worse a drug than alcohol. At least once it's legalized you'd be able to buy it by strenght (just like alcohol) and know what kind of effects you were getting. At the moment a lot of people get some wickedly bad highs from pot that's way too strong for them. Negative effects of THC (like paranoia) are increased a hundred folds if the user has a mental illness such as schizophrenia. They get so bad that a study on schizophrenia and pot had to stop the tests because the subjects were seriously becoming psychotic. With it being legalized people would have better control over what they take and could avoid pot in too strong doses. So legalization is definitely the way to go for the public good.
However, I do have an opposition to the whole "Medicinal use" thing. There is NO such thing as "Medical Marijuana". There's marijuana used for medical purposes, but that's not the same thing. You can get the same effects of NyQuil with a shot of Jack Daniels and some red wine, but neither would be called "Medical Alcohol". I've noticed that in the sea of demands to legalize pot for medical use there isn't anything about synthesizing the positive effects of the drug on patients in the smallest possible dose. Why does it work? How does it work? Can we make it work better? Can it be used in pill form for patients with lung problems? Could it be used as a liquid? Timed released? NONE of this is being studied and none of this is being demanded by the medical marijuana people. I think essentially that the whole medical thing is a sham for squinty eyed potheads who wanna get high without a hassle. It's pathetic. I'm not 100% sure, but I don't even think there have been serious tests pitting marijuana effects against currently available medecines in an impartial study. Because, like it or not, it is entirely possible that patients who use marijuana for medical uses simply like the high as opposed to the effect it has on their health. One of the things that the Schizophrenia study I talked about proved was that Schizophrenics used pot compulsively even though it made their illness a million times worse. Then, when asked about it, they'd say it made them feel better. So there's a contradiction there that's worth pursuing further as well.
Hahahaha wrote:I don't know how you would get the seed or seedlings. They will not sell them to an unlicensed grower, period. I guess you could get some seedlings from a grower after they are done planting. They must buy a bit extra and have some leftovers.
It would be a mistake though, curing tobacco is a skill and without a good cure tobacco is pretty horrid.
Did I mention that I worked on a tobacco farm for about 6 seasons? A good friend's family used to grow it. Not anymore.
PAX
Tobacco seeds can be had without license.. that's all that matters. And the Tobacco Tanning is more of an art than a science... I had friends that worked the fields in Tillsonburg (my back still aches... you get it
) Your friend's family is probably growing Soy now I'll bet.
Knoxfire: there are studies that involve growing specialized plants for their THC effect (basically they're un-smokable, but you can get the liquid without a big hassle) on glaucoma patients. There are a few eye drop remedies for the condition, and the THC is the same compound as in the Cannabis Sativa plants, albeit more concentrated and refined.
The other effects of THC beyond the psychoactive are pretty minimal other than the off-setting of nausea and stimulation of appetite. Nausea can be staved off by anti-emetics, and appetite can be stimulated by (get this) Diet Soft Drinks. The medicinal marijuana advocates (including doctors and even some police) usually point out that there are numerous ways to deliver the compounds into the body, and because they aren't exclusively limited to cigarette/hookah inhalation (think cookies, or brownies for pulmonary cancer patients) the drug itself is highly flexible.
The problem with concentrating the THC content is that the nerves in the brain that THC normally works on get burned out a lot faster if there is a continued and concentrated dose.
Either way, the plant is a lot less likely to induce problems with a healthy person than the concentrate.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
They grow barley, wheat and corn like everyone else in their area now. Mostly grain crops but a few beans wouldn't be out of the question. Sad in a way. In a morbid kind of way I kind of miss priming tobacco. It sucked, it was wet and sticky in the morning and hot as Hades in the afternoon. Luckily we were usually done for the day by 1 or 2pm. I guess I miss the comradery, as the job itself was near-mindless hard labour that was full of tar and sand. The pay was pretty good for a summer job.
Canabis (I don't like using "marijuana" as it was a term used to discredit the plant by making a Mexican connection and exploiting people's predjudices during the 30s), has a lot more to it than THC. There are many complex compounds, hundreds of them, they need to be studied. Canabanolic acic (spelling?) can form a bunch of different forms of THC as well, each with different properties. The major psychoactive form is delta-9 THC but there are others in lesser quantity. The plant still hold much mystery after centuries of use. Kinda cool.
I am unsure (as everyone should be) as to canabis's medical value but I can tell you that I know a guy that was diagnosed with AIDS in 1985 and is still alive. His doctor says that when he started smoking pot his white blood cell count went up signifigantly. His doctor is unsure as well but gives part credit for his survival to canabis. He also takes a terrible drug coctail that I can barely stand the smell of. He has one medicine that if I'm in the room when he opens the bottle I gag, it stinks that badly. He has to drink it. yuck! So if pot helps keep him alive in a way he can stand, so be it, let him have the stuff.
Non-addictive (unlike the oh so popular opiates being perscribed, Oxycotin anyone?), with an LD50 number so high it should be considered non-toxic, with some benifit (even if it isn't fully understood), good enough for me. Now we need to fund some studies to see the real benefit (if any other than psychological), and find out what else we can do with it.
A very useful plant. To me, the fact that it grows in almost every climate on the Earth tells me we should be using it. It is here for a reason.
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
i brought this back up because of the post in off topic. Pretty much everything that i wanted to say has been said in the above. But please watch this short vid here.
Let me clue you people that havent smoked pot in. It doesnt happen like this. Both of the men would have first sadistically bound and raped the women b4 killing eachother.
Some people still believe this. But some people try it and find out the truth. Then they ask themselves: Gee, if my parents and the government lied to me about pot, I wonder about the other drugs too. And another point. Does anyone think that the government and the media has changed their tactics, or that this was the only topic that they have influenced with outright lies?
Reefer madness is one of the best worst films of all time...I can't believe people were dumb enough to believe it!!!!
Goodbye Callisto & Skađi, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
[quote=Keeper Of The Light™ (Strazca)]Reefer madness is one of the best worst films of all time...I can't believe people were dumb enough to believe it!!!!I find your lack of faith(in people's stupidity)... disturbing.
I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
first time i tried it, first words out of my mouth were something to the effect of "this isnt like they say it is on the commercials"
Hahahaha wrote:
It grows (wild if given the chance) in almost every region in the world, it can be a food source, a fibre source (not a good one like hemp, but still) a fuel source, a paper pulp supply (the real reason it was made illegal) medicine, and fairly safe recreation. As a recreational drug it is far safer than alcohol, which is legal.
you do realize that hemp is from the cannabis plant right?
As far as medicinal use, I believe it does hold certain properties that could be considered of a healing nature. Now, whether or not there is actual physical reconstruction or repair done, I don't know.
lets not forget that clothes made out of hemp will out last a person wearing them almost everyday. It is far superior to cotton hands down
The 50 horsepower sticker "POWERED by whatever" <------Dumb retards
Not only would it create a new source of tax revenue, but imagine how much tax money it will save not having to run "criminals" through the legal system for weed charges.
KevinP (Stabby McShankyou) wrote:
and I'm NOT a pedo. everyone knows i've got a wheelchair fetish.
Harrington Esquire wrote:Not only would it create a new source of tax revenue, but imagine how much tax money it will save not having to run "criminals" through the legal system for weed charges.
Yep, we go after growers, transporters, sellers, and consumers. We allocate alot of policing hours that could be used against real crime. We spend money both prosecuting them and defending them(government provided defense attorneys), spend more on housing, feeding, and guarding them. Many of these people have actual jobs and are productive members of society who happen to enjoy a little pot - no different than someone who enjoys a little beer after work - and we remove them from society to throw them into a box.
Even the currently rising violence and chaos in Mexico is linked to them supporting our senseless and insane drug policies. Perpetual civil war in Columbia, I could go on. Our domestic gangs (and by proxy, all gang related crime and violence) are funded because of it. The only thing we "benefit" from it is telling people what to do with their own bodies.
Yes, even the Taliban is benefiting from our drug war. They are almost entirely funded through being "on the other side" of the "war on drugs," growing and selling insane amounts of opium in Afghanistan. Yep, they are better funded though that than through oil. Its all because of a very profitable black market - a black market that shouldn't/wouldn't exist without our "war on drugs" and all the countries that go along with it to appease us. Of course we tend to fund alot of other their(many other countries) efforts too.
Its a total money black hole for us and a "money bomb" for our enemies and for our own society's worst. Its likely the worst policy decision we ever made. But if we believe in the "war on drugs" so much, we should bring back alcohol prohibition for exactly the same reasons. Every reason given that various drugs should be illegal - they ring just as perfectly true for alcohol - if not more so in many cases. Prohibition worked so well and all so I don't know why we stopped it!! We should add tobacco into our "war" too.
Just look at tobacco - its not THAT bad for us, but certainly it does hurt us and IT IS A DRUG. It's bad for its users and its bad for society. Yet I've never heard of any violent cartels growing it, nor gangs selling it(aside from stolen shipments etc - true of anything they can steal). The reason is simple - its legal. It is grown, distributed, and sold by the free market. There is no room for thugs to make a buck. Make it illegal(and I'm sure that many in America want to do just that) and watch it mimic everything you've seen so far with other banned substances. In the mean time, 14 year olds have a MUCH easier time getting illegal drugs than getting tobacco.
People may say that legalizing drugs will increase use - but history says otherwise. Make it legal, and you remove the "cool" factor, the mystery, the feeling where teenagers think they are "rebelling against the man" by taking it. Inversely, illegality something does quite the opposite. Prohibition increased drinking rates ALOT and drinking deaths even more(because the alcohol produced them was much less safe - something mirrored in current illegal drugs). People who NEVER drank in their whole lives picked it up, formerly law-abiding regular citizens started their own distilleries, and men like Al Capone where born. The patten continues today with other illegal substances.
Just look at all the people who are stocking up on guns because of their misplaced fears that guns could soon be illegal. Of course even if they where(and they won't be), that won't stop the flow of arms, only divert the profits from their sale to the scum of the earth. And if that actually did happen, the talk would be that "legalizing gun ownership at this point will only promote murder and gang violence" etc etc. That is EXACTLY what you'd hear. Does that kinda BS talk sound familiar at all? Anyone?
A government that stays out of your business(aka small government) cannot co-exist with a government that must control everything. I'd think this point would ring with the very same conservatively-biased people that generally support the drug war. But supporting such nonsense really is contrary to traditional conservative principals once you think about it. And if you don't believe in your own principals, just what do you believe in? It's also ironic to me that so many liberally-biased people support legalization, since they tend to believe you can legislate a better society(which to me is nonsense) - I'd say the drug war is a nice fit for that kinda thinking - and at the core, that's exactly what the drug war is - a vain attempt to legislate a better society.
